[0001] Embodiments of the present invention relate to using location information to enhance
fraud risk scores for debit/credit card payments in the process of being authorized,
while providing privacy protection for the location information.
[0002] In 2012, payment card issuers, merchants, and their acquiring banks worldwide lost
$11.27 billion to fraudulent transactions, up 14.6% from 2011. The United States accounted
for about half of the global credit/debit card fraud losses ($5.3 billion) and fraud
losses continue to rise year over year. As mobile devices with GPS capabilities are
becoming pervasive, payment card processors are beginning to embrace solutions that
use location information to improve the precision of fraud risk scores for payments
in process. A payment transaction with a fraud risk score above a certain threshold
will be categorized as having a high probability of being fraudulent, and therefore
will be declined. The use of location information for determining a fraud risk score
is based on the premise that today's consumers usually carry their smartphones with
them at all times, and therefore their smartphone will be in the same location as
the consumer attempting to make a purchase. When a consumer swipes her payment card
at a point of sale terminal or submits the card information online, the card issuer
responsible for authorizing the payment checks two pieces of location information
and returns a score that lowers the fraud risk score if the locations are the same
or a score that increases the fraud risk score if they are different. The first location
is that of the payment, referred to as the payment location. It is the physical address/geographical
coordinates of the point of sale or the approximate physical address/geographical
coordinate of the computer from which an online payment was submitted. The computer
location is determined from its IP address through IP-to-geolocation techniques. The
second location, referred to as cardholder location, is the real-time location of
the consumer's smartphone obtained from the consumer's phone's GPS or through the
mobile service provider (e.g., AT&T, Sprint, Verizon etc.) using cellular tower or
Wi-Fi positioning technologies. The cardholder location is compared with the payment
location. If they are the same or they are spatially proximal based on a distance
parameter, a negative score is returned to reduce the fraud risk score. If they are
different, a positive location score is returned that will increase the fraud risk
score.
[0003] Existing solutions using location information to enhance fraud risk scores do not
consider the privacy of consumers' location information or other personal information.
For example, the service provider obtains information each time the cardholder makes
a purchase, as well as the location of the purchase. This can allow a service provider
to correlate purchases from the same location over time and potentially infer relationships
between cardholders and merchants. Additionally, the card issuing bank is also able
to track the cardholder's location. As privacy awareness continues to rise consumers
will increasingly object to any use of location information (including for fraud detection
purposes) that does not guarantee the privacy of their location. In addition, solutions
that release non-specific location information are preferred to those that leak exact
location coordinates because consumers will more readily consent to the use of their
non-specific location information than their exact location information. With the
current solutions, issuing banks require the consent of the consumers/cardholders
before providing their mobile numbers to service providers to obtain their location
information. Similarly, a service provider needs consumer consent before it can provide
customer location information to banks. Consent to use exact location information
of consumers is difficult to obtain in practice and rarely ever scales for large user
populations. Some financial institutions overcome the need to obtain consent by providing
an app to the consumer (e.g., online banking app). Again, only a small fraction of
consumers installs such apps, and when they do, the apps still require permission
from the users to access their location information. It would therefore be desirable
to have solutions that can protect consumer location information yet still enable
the use of such location information in the determination of fraud risk scores.
[0004] Embodiments of the present invention alleviate the problems described above by providing
solutions that protect consumer location information yet still enable the use of such
location information in the determination of fraud risk scores.
[0005] In accordance with embodiments of the present invention, cryptographic techniques
of private information retrieval (PIR) and homomorphic encryption are used to protect
consumer location information even as it is used to enhance fraud risk scores. PIR
is used to enable an issuer to retrieve non-specific location information using a
consumer mobile number as the query criterion without needing to share or disclose
the mobile number with the service provider. Homomorphic encryption is used to protect
location information of mobile consumers, while ensuring card issuers are only able
to learn non-specific information about the location of the consumer.
[0006] Therefore, it should now be apparent that embodiments of the invention substantially
achieve all the above aspects and advantages. Additional aspects and advantages will
be set forth in the description that follows.
[0007] The accompanying drawings illustrate presently preferred embodiments of the invention.
As shown throughout the drawings, like reference numerals designate like or corresponding
parts.
Figure 1 is a block diagram illustrating a system for determining a fraud risk score
using location information according to an embodiment of the present invention;
Figures 2A and 2B are flow diagrams illustrating the processing performed for determining
a fraud risk score using location information according to an embodiment of the present
invention; and
Figures 3A and 3B are flow diagrams illustrating the processing performed for determining
a fraud risk score using location information according to another embodiment of the
present invention.
[0008] In describing embodiments of the present invention, reference is made to the drawings,
wherein there is seen in Fig. 1 in block diagram form a system for determining a fraud
risk score using location information according to an embodiment. As illustrated in
Fig. 1, there are three main parties involved in the authorization process for debit/credit
card (hereinafter referred to as card payments) - the issuer bank(s) 10, cardholder(s)
12, and a service provider(s) 16. The issuer bank 10 is a financial institution that
issues credit and/or debit cards to its customers or cardholders. The issuer bank
10 knows the cardholder mobile number and wants to obtain the cardholder's location
information from the service provider and use it during payment authorization to enhance
the precision of fraud risk scores. In other words, the issuer bank 10 wants to detect
fraudulent uses of their card at the point of payment using the cardholder location
information. The cardholders 12 are consumers that have been issued a card by some
issuer bank 10. Each cardholder 12 has an associated mobile device 14, e.g., smartphone
or the like. The cardholders 12 are willing to allow issuer banks 10 to infer fraudulent
transactions using their location information that can be obtained from their mobile
device, but are concerned about the privacy of their location information. They like
the fact that their location information can help get the bank to authorize some of
their purchases, which the bank would have declined otherwise (false negatives). However,
they would still like to retain control of their location data. The service provider(s)
16 are providers of mobile phone services to cardholders 12. Examples include AT&T,
Sprint, Verizon, T-Mobile, etc. By the nature of their service and by law, these providers
constantly maintain an up-to-date list of the location information of the devices
on their network. Such information is useful, for example, in determining the closest
cell tower to use for routing a call to a device. Location-as-a-Service Providers
(LSP) can be used in the place of service providers to implement this embodiment.
LSP usually have contracts with multiple service providers, enabling a single LSP
to be used in the place of multiple service providers.
[0009] Each of the issuer bank(s) 10 and service providers(s) 16 operate a respective server
20, 22. Servers 20, 22 may be coupled to a database (not shown), which may be any
suitable type of memory device utilized to store information. The servers 20, 22 may
be coupled to a network, such as, for example the Internet, to allow communication
with other servers. Servers 20, 22 may be a mainframe or the like that includes at
least one processing device. Servers 20, 22 may be specially constructed for the required
purposes, or may comprise a general purpose computer selectively activated or reconfigured
by a computer program (described further below) stored therein. Such a computer program
may alternatively be stored in a computer readable storage medium, such as, but not
limited to, any type of disk including floppy disks, optical disks, CD-ROMs, and magnetic-optical
disks, read-only memories (ROMs), random access memories (RAMs), EPROMs, EEPROMs,
magnetic or optical cards, or any type of media suitable for storing electronic instructions,
which are executable by the processing device. One of ordinary skill in the art would
be familiar with the general components of a computing system upon which the method
of an embodiment may be performed.
[0010] According to an embodiment of the present invention, the system illustrated in Fig.
1 uses additively or fully homomorphic encryption to provide better cardholder privacy
when determining a fraud risk score. Figures 2A and 2B are flow diagrams illustrating
the processing performed for determining a fraud risk score using location information
according to an embodiment of the present invention. As a set-up procedure, in step
30 the issuer bank 10 generates a private/public key pair using an additive homomorphic
cryptosystem, such as, for example, Paillier's cryptosystem, and shares the public
key with the service provider 16. An additively homomorphic cryptosystem means that
given the public key and the encryption of two messages
m1 and
m2, one can compute the encryption of
m1 +
m2 without having to decrypt the messages, thereby maintaining the privacy of the messages.
The same or different key pairs can be used for the different service providers 16.
It should be understood that the key generation process in step 30 only needs to occur
once, or can occur on some other periodic basis as deemed necessary by the issuer
bank 10. In step 32, a payment transaction by a cardholder 12 of an issuer bank 10
begins with the cardholder 12 submitting payment information to a merchant who forwards
it to the merchant's bank. Such submission can be made, for example, through a point-of-sale
(POS) terminal or an Internet connected device such as a computer, tablet or a smartphone
14. The payment information can include, for example, the name of the merchant, the
name of the cardholder, the amount of the transaction, a description of the transaction,
the physical location of the merchant POS terminal, the location of the cardholder's
computer if the transaction is an on-line transaction, etc.
[0011] In step 34, the payment information is forwarded to the server 20 of the issuer bank
10 through the merchant bank. In step 36, using the payment information, the server
20 determines the payment location (locp). In step 38, based on the identification
of the cardholder 12 in the payment information, the server 20 obtains information
associated with the cardholder that it maintains in a database that includes the number
of the cardholder's mobile device 14. In step 40, the server 20 then computes a fraud
risk score using known techniques, (e.g., using payment velocity, proxy detection,
profiling and related techniques). In step 42, it is determined if the fraud risk
score is below a certain threshold (as may be determined by the issuer bank 10). If
in step 42, the fraud risk score is below the predetermined threshold (meaning the
issuing bank 10 believes there is little risk of the current transaction being fraudulent),
then in step 44 the transaction is approved as being as non-fraudulent.
[0012] However, if in step 42 it is determined that the fraud risk score exceeds the threshold,
then the server 20 will utilize the location information of the cardholder 12 to adjust
the fraud risk score. In step 46, the server 20 of the issuer bank 10 encrypts the
payment location (locp) and sends the encrypted payment location along with the number
of the cardholder's mobile device 14 to the server 22 of the service provider 16.
In step 48, the server 22 determines the location of the mobile device 14, which is
deemed to be the location of the cardholder 12, using its mobile location data, and
computes using the public key received from the issuer bank 10 a homomorphically blinded
encryption of the difference between the payment location (locp) and the cardholder
location (locc); that is response = E(r(locp - locc)), where r is a random non-zero
integer. The variable r is utilized to blind the result of (locp - locc). Without
r, it would be possible for the issuer bank 10 to indiscriminately determine the location
of any customer at any time by making a request to the service provider 16, even if
the customer was not doing any transaction. Note that the server 22 is able to carry
out this computation only having the encrypted value of locp, and therefore is never
actually provided with the location of the purchase made by the cardholder 12. In
step 50, the server 22 returns the encrypted response back to the server 20 of the
issuer bank 10 issuer. In step 52, the server 20 of the issuer bank 10 decrypts the
response using the private key. The result of decrypting E(r(locp - locc)) is either
zero or any other random integer. In step 54 the server 20 determines if the payment
location and cardholder location are the same or spatially proximal. Locations are
spatially proximal if they are located in the same grid. A spatial grid structure
having a plurality of cells is utilized to quantize and index locations. A grid can
be defined in many ways, provided that each location with a given latitude/longitude
is associated with a unique cell of the grid. For example, the United States can be
divided in many 100 x 100 meter cells that are each associated with a unique identifier.
The longitude and latitude of a user's current location will determine the grid used
to situate the user. It should be understood, of course, that the cell size need not
be limited to the example provided above, and could be any size and shape, e.g., hexagonal,
as desired. When the result from step 52 is zero, it means the locp is the same as
locc, e.g., is within the same grid, (a "yes" determination); otherwise the locations
are not the same, e.g., they are in different grids (a "no" determination). The difference
is hidden (blinded with r). If in step 54 it is determined that the payment location
(locp) and cardholder location (locc) are the same, then in step 56 the server 20
of the issuer bank 10 uses a negative location score to reduce the fraud risk score,
whereas if in step 54 it is determined that the payment location and cardholder location
are not the same, then in step 58, it uses a positive location score to increase the
fraud risk score. In step 60, the server 20 of the issuer bank utilizes the adjusted
fraud risk score to determine if the transaction will be approved or not.
[0013] While the processing described in Figs. 2A and 2B protects the privacy of the cardholder's
location and transaction information from the service providers 16 (recall that the
service provider only receives the payment location in encrypted form), the service
provider 16 still learns location information about every purchase made by the cardholder
(since the service provider determines the location of the cardholder when requested)
and can infer relationships about cardholders and merchants using available spatial
information. Figures 3A and 3B are flow diagrams illustrating the processing performed
for determining a fraud risk score using location information according to another
embodiment of the present invention in which Private Information Retrieval (PIR) and
homomorphic encryption are used to provide strong privacy guarantees for cardholders'
location information. Private Information Retrieval (PIR), as is known in the art,
helps to provide access privacy by preventing sensitive information in client queries
from being disclosed to a service host during data lookup. It provides a means for
retrieving data from a database/service without the database/service (or its provider)
being able to learn any information about which particular item was retrieved. Note
that PIR does not hinder data retrieval functions of the service, but it enhances
it in such a manner that keeps any information in a query and its result confidential
or hidden from the service and other third parties.
[0014] Referring now to Fig. 3A, in step 80, the server 22 of the service provider 16 generates
a private/public key pair using an additive homomorphic cryptosystem as previously
described, and provides the public key to the server 20 of issuer bank 10. In step
82, the server 22 of service provider 16 encrypts each location in its location data
set (the current location of each mobile device 14 on its network) using the public
key. Whenever a mobile subscriber changes location, an encryption of the new location
is used to update the data set. In step 84, a payment transaction by a cardholder
12 of an issuer bank 10 begins with the cardholder 12 submitting payment information
to a merchant who forwards it to the merchant's bank. Such submission can be made,
for example, through a point-of-sale (POS) terminal or an Internet connected device
such as a computer, tablet or a smartphone 14. The payment information can include,
for example, the name of the merchant, the name of the cardholder, the amount of the
transaction, a description of the transaction, the physical location of the merchant
POS terminal, the location of the cardholder's computer if the transaction is an on-line
transaction, etc.
[0015] In step 86, the payment information is forwarded to the server 20 of the issuer bank
10 through the merchant bank. In step 88, using the payment information, the server
20 determines the payment location (locp). In step 90, based on the identification
of the cardholder 12 in the payment information, the server 20 obtains information
associated with the cardholder that it maintains in a database that includes the number
of the cardholder's mobile device 14. In step 92, the server 20 then computes a fraud
risk score using known techniques, (e.g., using payment velocity, proxy detection,
profiling and related techniques). In step 94, it is determined if the fraud risk
score is below a certain threshold (as may be determined by the issuer bank 10). If
in step 94, the fraud risk score is below the predetermined threshold (meaning the
issuing bank 10 believes there is little risk of the current transaction being fraudulent),
then in step 96 the transaction is approved as being as non-fraudulent.
[0016] However, if in step 94 it is determined that the fraud risk score exceeds the threshold,
then the server 20 will utilize the location information of the cardholder 12 to adjust
the fraud risk score. In step 98, the server 20 uses PIR to encode the mobile number
of the cardholder into a PIR query, which it forwards to the server 22 of the service
provider 16. In step 100, the server 22 encodes a result containing the cardholder
location (locc) using the received query in conjunction with its list of encrypted
locations to determine the location of the user. In step 102, the server 22 returns
the encoded result, i.e., an encryption of locc, back to the server 20 of the issuer
bank 20. Note that because PIR is utilized, the service provider 16 does not learn
any information about the mobile number included in the query or the corresponding
encrypted cardholder location (locc) that was returned back to the issuer bank 10.
In step 104, the server 20 of the issuer bank 10 uses the public key received from
the service provider 16 to compute a response that is a homomorphically-blinded encryption
of the difference between the payment location (locp) and the cardholder location
(locc), that is response = E(r(locp - locc)), where r is a random non-zero integer.
It does this without learning locc. In step 106, the server 20 sends the computed
response to the server 22 of the service provider 16. In step 108, the server 22 decrypts
the response using the private key to obtain a yes/no answer to the query of whether
the payment location is the same as the cardholder location (as described above with
respect to Fig. 2), which it returns to the server 20 of the issuer bank 10. The issuer
bank 10 can then use the result to enhance the fraud risk score for the transaction.
In step 110 the server 20 determines, using the answer from the service provider 16,
if the payment location and cardholder location are the same. If in step 110 it is
determined that the payment location (locp) and cardholder location (locc) are the
same, then in step 112 the server 20 of the issuer bank 10 uses a negative location
score to reduce the fraud risk score, whereas if in step 110 it is determined that
the payment location and cardholder location are not the same, then in step 114, it
uses a positive location score to increase the fraud risk score. That is, the issuer
bank 10 uses a negative location score to reduce the fraud risk score if a "yes" response
if received in step 108 and a positive location score to increase the fraud risk score
if "no" response is received in step 108. In step 116, the server 20 of the issuer
bank 10 utilizes the adjusted fraud risk score to determine if the transaction will
be approved or not. Thus, using the processing as described in Figs. 3A and 3B, the
service provider 16 is unable to learn or link any information (mobile number or location
data) with any cardholder, thereby guaranteeing cardholder privacy. The issuer bank
10 as well cannot indiscriminately track or stalk cardholders using their location
information from the service provider, because it only gets a yes/no response.
[0017] While preferred embodiments of the invention have been described and illustrated
above, it should be understood that these are exemplary and are not to be considered
as limiting. Additions, deletions, substitutions, and other modifications can be made
without departing from the scope of the appended claims.
1. A computer implemented method for using location information of a consumer to adjust
a fraud risk score for a payment card transaction being performed by the consumer
with a merchant, the method comprising:
receiving, by a server via a network, information related to the payment card transaction
from the merchant;
determining, by the server, a payment location based on the information related to
the payment card transaction received from the merchant;
encrypting, by the server using a public key of an additively homomorphic cryptosystem,
the determined payment location;
obtaining, by the server, an identification associated with a mobile device of the
consumer;
sending, by the server via the network, the encrypted payment location and obtained
identification to a service provider that provides mobile services to the mobile device
of the consumer, wherein the service provider determines a current location of the
mobile device of the consumer using the identification associated with the mobile
device of the consumer;
receiving, by the server from the service provider, a blinded encryption, computed
using the public key, of a difference between the payment location and current location
of the mobile device of the consumer;
decrypting, by the server using a private key corresponding to the public key, the
blinded encryption of the difference between the payment location and current location
of the mobile device of the consumer to produce a result;
determining, by the server, if the payment location and current location of the mobile
device of the consumer are spatially proximal based on the result; and
adjusting, by the server, a fraud risk score for the payment card transaction based
on the determination that the payment location and current location of the mobile
device of the consumer are spatially proximal.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein adjusting the fraud risk score for the payment card
transaction further comprises:
increasing the fraud risk score if the payment location and current location of the
mobile device of the consumer are not spatially proximal; and
decreasing the fraud risk score if the payment location and current location of the
mobile device of the consumer are spatially proximal.
3. The method of claim 1 or claim 2, wherein determining if the payment location and
current location of the mobile device of the consumer are spatially proximal based
on the result further comprises:
determining that the payment location and current location of the mobile device of
the consumer are spatially proximal if the result is zero; and
determining that the payment location and current location of the mobile device of
the consumer are not spatially proximal if the result is not zero.
4. The method of any preceding claim, wherein determining if the payment location and
current location of the mobile device of the consumer are spatially proximal further
comprises:
determining if the payment location and current location of the mobile device of the
consumer are within a same grid of a spatial grid having a plurality of cells utilized
to quantize and index locations.
5. The method of any preceding claim, wherein the identification associated with the
mobile device of the consumer is a telephone number of the mobile device.
6. The method of any preceding claim, wherein the information related to the payment
card transaction includes at least one of the merchant's name, the consumer's name,
an amount of the transaction, a description of the transaction, a physical location
of point of sale terminal operated by the merchant, and a location of computer used
by the consumer if the transaction is an on-line transaction.
7. A computer implemented method for using location information of a consumer to adjust
a fraud risk score for a payment card transaction being performed by the consumer
with a merchant, the method comprising:
receiving, by a server via a network, information related to the payment card transaction
from the merchant;
determining, by the server, a payment location based on the information related to
the payment card transaction received from the merchant;
obtaining, by the server, an identification associated with a mobile device of the
consumer;
encoding, by the server, the identification associated with the mobile device of the
consumer into a private information retrieval query;
sending, by the server via the network, the private information retrieval query to
a service provider that provides mobile services to the mobile device of the consumer;
receiving, by the server via the network from the service provider, a current location
of the mobile device of the consumer that is encrypted using a public key;
computing, by the server using the public key, a homomorphically-blinded encryption
of a difference between the payment location and current location of the mobile device
of the consumer to produce a response;
sending, by the server via the network, the response to the service provider, wherein
the service provider uses a private key corresponding to the public key the decrypt
the response, the decrypted response indicating if the payment location and current
location of the mobile device of the consumer are spatially proximal;
receiving, by the server via the network from the service provider, the decrypted
response; and
adjusting, by the server, a fraud risk score for the payment card transaction based
on the indication that the payment location and current location of the mobile device
of the consumer are spatially proximal.
8. The method of claim 7, wherein adjusting the fraud risk score for the payment card
transaction further comprises:
increasing the fraud risk score if the payment location and current location of the
mobile device of the consumer are not spatially proximal; and
decreasing the fraud risk score if the payment location and current location of the
mobile device of the consumer are spatially proximal.
9. The method of claim 7 or claim 8, wherein the payment location and current location
of the mobile device of the consumer are spatially proximal if the decrypted response
is zero; and
the payment location and current location of the mobile device of the consumer are
not spatially proximal if the decrypted response is not zero.
10. The method of any of claims 7 to 9, wherein the payment location and current location
of the mobile device of the consumer are spatially proximal if the payment location
and current location of the mobile device of the consumer are within a same grid of
a spatial grid having a plurality of cells utilized to quantize and index locations.
11. The method of any of claims 7 to 10, wherein the identification associated with the
mobile device of the consumer is a telephone number of the mobile device.
12. The method of any of claims 7 to 11, wherein the information related to the payment
card transaction includes at least one of the merchant's name, the consumer's name,
an amount of the transaction, a description of the transaction, a physical location
of point of sale terminal operated by the merchant, and a location of computer used
by the consumer if the transaction is an on-line transaction.